ĠSTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SCIENCE ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
M.Sc. THESIS
JUNE 2016
A FUZZY SET APPROACH FOR ACCEPTABILITY OF EIA THROUGH INTEGRATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Mustafa KAVUKCU
Department of Environmental Engineering Environmental Sciences and Engineering Programme
Department of Environmental Engineering Environmental Sciences and Engineering Programme
JUNE 2016
ĠSTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SCIENCE ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
A FUZZY SET APPROACH FOR ACCEPTABILITY OF EIA THROUGH INTEGRATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
M.Sc. THESIS Mustafa KAVUKCU
(501131750)
Çevre Mühendisliği Anabilim Dalı Çevre Bilimi ve Mühendisliği Programı
HAZĠRAN 2016
ĠSTANBUL TEKNĠK ÜNĠVERSĠTESĠ FEN BĠLĠMLERĠ ENSTĠTÜSÜ
ENTEGRE YÖNETĠM SĠSTEMLERĠYLE KABUL EDĠLEBĠLĠR BĠR ÇEVRESEL ETKĠ DEĞERLENDĠRME ĠÇĠN BULANIK MANTIK
YAKLAġIMI
YÜKSEK LĠSANS TEZĠ Mustafa KAVUKCU
(501131750)
Thesis Advisor : Prof. Dr. Ġlhan TALINLI ... İstanbul Technical University
Jury Members : Prof. Dr. Fatma Gülen ĠSKENDER ... Istanbul Technical University
Ass.Prof. Dr. Elçin GÜNEġ ... Namık Kemal University
Mustafa KAVUKCU, a M.Sc.student of İTU Graduate School of ScienceEngineering andTechnology student ID 501131750, successfully defended the thesis/dissertation entitled “THESIS TITLE”, which he/she prepared after fulfilling the requirements specified in the associated legislations, before the jury whose signatures are below.
Date of Submission : 27 May 2016 Date of Defense : 10 June 2016
FOREWORD
I let my gratitude in this study, showing the way to help and support me and who contributed greatly in the completion of my thesis, Prof.Dr.İlhan Talınlı.
I would like to state that all who have supported me at every stage of my life and I also state my gratitude to my wife Meltem, my daughter İdil and my son Mehmet Emir sincere feeling standing behind me..
June 2016 Mustafa KAVUKCU
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FOREWORD ... ix TABLE OF CONTENTS ... xi ABBREVIATIONS ... xiii SYMBOLS ... xv
LIST OF TABLES ... xvii
LIST OF FIGURES ... xix
SUMMARY ... xxi
ÖZET ... xxiii
1. INTRODUCTION ... 1
1.1 Aim & Scope ... 2
2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ... 5
2.1 History and Evaluation of Environmental Impact Assessment ... 5
2.2 Definition of Environmental Impact Assessment ... 8
2.2.1 Environmental impact values ... 10
2.2.2 Strategic environmental assessment ... 11
2.2.3 Milestone and typology of EIA ... 12
2.3 Environmental Impact Assessment Methods ... 13
2.3.1 Methods for organizing and presenting information ... 14
3. INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (IMS) ... 17
3.1 Dimensions of Integration ... 18
3.2 The Development towards Integrated Management Systems ... 19
3.3 Plan-Do-Check-Act ... 20
3.4 Integration Models ... 21
3.5 Integration of ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 Management Systems ... 22
3.6 Combination of ISO 9001 & ISO 14001 & OHSAS 18001 into anIMS ... 26
3.7 Background of ISO ... 28
3.8 ISO 9001 Standard ... 28
3.9 ISO 14000 Series and Environmental Management System... 37
3.10 OHSAS 18001 ... 42
3.11 Environmental Remediation ... 45
3.12 Incremental Health Risk ... 47
4. METARIAL and METHODS ... 51
4.1 Analytic Hierarchy Process ... 53
4.2 How to Structure a Decision Problem ... 54
4.3 How to Structure a Hierarchy ... 55
4.4 Judgment and Comparison ... 56
4.5 The AHP Theory and Calculation ... 57
4.6 Intuitive Justification of the Method ... 58
4.7 Computing of Eigenvector ... 60
4.8 Consistency Index (C.I) ... 61
4.10 Calculation of Factor Index ... 63
4.11 Fuzzy Logic ... 64
4.12 Basic of Fuzzy Sets ... 65
4.12.1 Definition of a fuzzy set ... 65
4.13 Membership Function ... 66
4.14 Elementary Operator for Fuzzy Sets ... 68
4.15 Defuzzification ... 70
4.16 Centroid principle or Center of Gravity ... 70
4.17 Reduction of the Impact Magnitude ... 71
5. THE PROPOSED IMPACT ASSESSMENT APPROACH FOR THE ... 73
5.1 Description of Proposed Approach ... 73
5.2 Steps of the Proposed Approach ... 74
5.2.1 Preliminary step... 75
5.2.2 Creating FI and impact criteria... 77
5.2.3 The measurement of the factors in the FI hierarchy... 77
6. APPLICATION ... 93
6.1 FI Measurement Step ... 94
6.1.1 Evaluation of the benefit of project ... 94
6.1.2 The Comparison of factor index of BoP ... 100
6.1.3. The Convert STFN to fuzzy set of BoP ... 102
6.1.4 Estimating environmental impact... 103
6.1.5 The Comparison of factor index of the EEI ... 108
6.1.6. The Fuzzy inference for EEI ... 108
6.1.7 Impact magnitude and intersection of BoP & EEI ... 110
6.1.8 Defuzzification and obtaining impact magnitude ... 111
6.2 Residual of Impact Magnitude ... 116
6.2.1- Reduction of the impact magnitude ... 116
7. CONCLUSION ... 125
ABBREVIATIONS
A : Agriculture
Ad HOC : Ad hoc is a Latin phrase meaning "for this" AHP : Analytic Hierarchy Process
AQ : Air Quality
AVtR : Add Value to Region BoP : Benefit of the Project
C : Climate
C&LC : Cultural and Local Compatibility CIP : Clean in Place
CP : Cleaner Production
DIS : The draft international Standard DoI : Distribution of Income
DS : Demographic Stability
EEI : Estimated Environmental Impact EFP : Eco Friendly Production
EHS : Environmental, Health and Safety EIA : Environmental Impact Assessment EIS : Environmental Impact Statement EMS : Environmental Management System Emp : Employment
EPA : Environmental Protection Agency
ETV : Environmental Technology Verification
F : Forest
FAHP : Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process FDIS : The final draft international Standard FF : Flora, Fauna
GS : Geomorphologic Structure H&TA : Historical & Touristic Area
IM : Impact Magnitude
IMS : Integrated Management System
ISO : The International Organization for Standardization L-BoP : Large (Benefit means) - BoP
L-EEI : L ( great damage means) –EEI MCDA : Multi Criteria Decision Analysis
MMR : Materials Management and Remediation
NEPA : National Environmental Policy Act NT : New Technology
OHSAMS : Occupational Health Safety Management System OHSAS : Occupation Health and Safety Assessment Series P : Productivity
PB : Public Benefit PDCA : Plan-Do-Check-Act
QMS : Quality Management System RA : Recreational area
RC : Resource Conservation
RCRA : The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act S-BoP : Less (benefit means) – BoP
SC : Subcommittees
SEA : Strategic Environmental Assessment S-EEI : S ( less or negligible damage means) –EEI S&GW : Surface & Groundwater
SI : Source Independency
STFN : Standard Trapezoid Fuzzy Number TC : Technical Committees
U : Urbanization
UNEP : United Nation Environment Program
W : Welfare
SYMBOLS
C : Capacitance
C.I : Consistency Index
R.I : Random Index
C.R : Consistency Ratio F.I : Factor Index
IM : Impact Magnitude
IMBoP : Total Impact Magnitude of BoP IMEEI : Total Impact Magnitude of EEI
IMC : The calculated IM IMA : Acceptable IM IMR : Residual IM
IMEMS : Total IM of EMS
a ij : a ij is the value in the ith row, j column of a; also called i, j entry of “a”
w
i : own weight for i th criterionwi
’ :inhierarchy weight for i th criterionλmax. : is calculated by averaging the value of the consistency Vector
μ :Membership function
Z :Crisp output
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 2.1: History of Environmental Impact Assessment... 7
Table 2.2: Information Presented in Checklists and Matrices. ... 15
Table 3.1: Common Requirements of ISO 9001- ISO 14001- OHSAS 18001... 27
Table 3.2: Comparison of ISO 9001:2008 and ISO 9001:2015. ... 35
Table 3.3: Comparison of ISO 9001:2008 & 2015 base on important change. ... 36
Table 3.4: ISO 14000 Families. ... 38
Table 3.5: Examples of ecological hazards posed by terrestrial remedial action. .... 46
Table 4.1: Summary of Search Terms. ... 52
Table 4.2: Percent Distribution of MCDA Method by Application Area. ... 53
Table 4.3: List of Degree Importance. ... 56
Table 4.4: RI(n) values from various authors. ... 62
Table 4.5: Acceptable RI(n) values for this study. ... 62
Table 4.6: Acceptance Scale of IMC. ... 71
Table 5.1: Severity scale of FI and IM Component. ... 78
Table 6.1: Sub Factors and Values of the Benefit of Project. ... 95
Table 6.2: The priority weight of sub factor of BoP. ... 100
Table 6.3: FI* Calculation of Benefit of the Project. ... 101
Table 6.4: The Membership value of BoP. ... 103
Table 6.5: Sub Factors and Fuzzy Values of the EEI... 104
Table 6.6:The priority weight of sub factor of EEI. ... 108
Table 6.7: FI* Calculation of EEI. ... 109
Table 6.8: The Membership value of EEI. ... 110
Table 6.9: The Membership value of IMc... 113
Table 6.10: Small value of Benefit of Project. ... 114
Table 6.11: Small Estimation of Environmental Impact. ... 114
Table 6.12: The comparison of combination of BoP & EEI base on IM. ... 115
Table 6.13: Evaluation of Key Factors within EMS constituents. ... 117
Table 6.14: Priority weight of the objectives of EEI... 118
Table 6.15: The Table of reduced IM values with EMS tools . ... 122
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 3.1: Top Down Integration. ... 18
Figure 3.2: IMS for Facility (IMS, 2016). ... 22
Figure 3.3: Quality Management System Model (ISO 9001). ... 33
Figure 3.4: Environmental Management System Model (ISO 14001). ... 41
Figure 4.1: Membership grades of μA(x)and μB(x). ... 66
Figure 4.2: Some characteristic of membership function. ... 67
Figure 4.3: A Fuzzy Logic System ... 69
Figure 5.1: Flow chart of Fuzzy reasoning IM assessment model... 76
Figure 5.2: A General Structure of FI hierarchy. ... 79
Figure 5.3: Flow chart of Model. ... 81
Figure 5.4: The hierarchical structure of Model. ... 82
Figure 5.5: The intersection of BoP and EEI. ... 83
Figure 5.6:1st and 2nd levels level of BoP. ... 83
Figure 5.7: 1st and 2nd levels level of EEI. ... 84
Figure 5.8: 2nd level of BoP and 3rd levels of Economic factor. ... 85
Figure 5.9: 2nd level of BoP and 3rd levels of Technical factor. ... 85
Figure 5.10: 2nd level of BoP and 3rd levels of Socio Political factor... 86
Figure 5.11: 2nd level of BoP and 3rd levels of Environmental factor. ... 87
Figure 5.12: 2nd level of EEI and 3rd levels of Terrestrial Eco factor. ... 90
Figure 5.13: 2nd level of EEI and 3rd levels of Aquatic Eco factor. ... 91
Figure 5.14: 2nd level of EEI and 3rd levels of Atmospheric Eco factor. ... 91
Figure 6.1: Matrix of the Benefit of Project... 96
Figure 6.2: The fuzzufied matrix of Economical factor... 97
Figure 6.3: Comparison characteristics with respect to Economical. ... 98
Figure 6.4: Comparison characteristics with respect to Technical. ... 99
Figure 6.5: Comparison characteristics with respect to Socio Economical. ... 99
Figure 6.6: Comparison characteristics with respect to Environmental. ... 99
Figure 6.7: Determination of the membership value and FI* Class for BoP. ... 102
Figure 6.8: Matrix of the Estimating of Environmental Impact. ... 105
Figure 6.9: The Fuzzified Matrix of Terrestrial Eco System Factors. ... 106
Figure 6.10: Comparison characteristics ... 107
Figure 6.11: Matrix of Aquatic Eco System. ... 107
Figure 6.12: Matrix of Atmospheric Eco System. ... 108
Figure 6.13: Determination of the membership value and FI* Class for EEI. ... 110
Figure 6.14: Fuzzy Inference of IM for BoP & EEI. ... 112
Figure 6.15: Class and Membership degree of IMC for BoP and EEI. ... 113
Figure 6.16: The graph of three different IM Characteristics. ... 115
Figure 6.17: Matrix for Flora Fauna evaluating with EMS constituents. ... 117
Figure 6.18: The combination of priority weight values of EIM. ... 118
Figure 6.19: The converted table of Figure 6.18 base on 10 score. ... 119
Figure 6.21: Optimistic EMS tool. ... 121 Figure 6.22: Assuring more safe EMS tools. ... 122 Figure 6.23: The graph of different IMS application ... 123 Figure 7.1: Impact Magnitude Scale. ... 127 Figure 7.2: Rank of combination of IMS. ... 128
FUZZY SET APPROACH FOR ACCEPTABILITY OF EIA THROUGH INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
SUMMARY
Nowadays people need is increasing with each passing day. To meet those needs require industrialization, urbanization and economic development. While performing these changes, the consumption of environmental resources and the ecological damage cycle has been increased.
In parallel, this ecological destruction and consumption of environmental sources increased pollutions and it decreased environmental quality.
The contradiction between increasing environmental pollution and economic development, could not be a solution yet. Studies are underway in this regards. A model was created in order to contribute to these efforts.
To reveal the size of the environmental impact, the main parameters that cause the dilemma of industrial development and environmental pollution has been taken into account. The magnitude of the environmental impact obtained has been reduced through the use of environmental management systems (EIA).
In this study, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Fuzzy Logic is thought as the most appropriate method to be used.
The reason for choosing the Analytical Hierarchy Model is to provide a systematic approach to hierarchy of sub-factors which will reveal the environmental Impact Magnitude.
With pair-wise comparison method which is the basic feature of AHP, all sub-factors were compared in pair wise comparison with each other.
In assessments that are vague and uncertain, fuzzy logic-based modeling has been used. With Fuzzy Logic model, linguistic variables of expert opinion are used as an input instead of uncertainty and missing data. Thus, Factor index (FI) and membership grade used in the calculation of the environmental impact magnitude (IM) is found.
The implementation steps of the proposed approach, a environmental impact of facility and the environmental value affected by facility was assessed "big" and "small" qualifying. The impact magnitude which is obtained by possible combinations are assessed.
To reduce the calculated impact magnitude, a method have been developed with ISO 9001 ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001 which is the combination of Environmental Management System.
In the model, in order to contribute to the reduction of environmental impacts, according to the production type of facility, remediation is recommended for using as a support elements of the Environmental Management System. For reduction of Environmental Impact, a rating scale has been obtained by utilizing the constituent of Environmental Management System.
Thus, for environmental impact assessment, decision-makers is offered flexible alternatives. Model is proposed to be used as quantitative support at EIA studies in the planning stage of the project.
ENTEGRE YÖNETĠM SĠSTEMLERĠYLE KABUL EDĠLEBĠLĠR BĠR ÇEVRESEL ETKĠ DEĞERLENDĠRME ĠÇĠN BULANIK MANTIK
YAKLAġIMI ÖZET
Bilindiği gibi çevre koruma felsefesinde iki görüş hakimdir. Bu görüşlerden biri konservasyonist(conservationist) diğeri ise preservasyonist(preservationist) görüştür. Türkçede her iki görüş de korumacı olarak tercüme edilsede, konservasyonist görüş doğal kaynakların “akılcı kullanımı”nı, preservasyonist görüş ise hiçbir şekilde doğal kaynaklara dokunulmamasını ifade etmektedir.
Günümüzde konservasyonist görüşün ağır bastığı söylenebilir.
Dünya nüfusunun kontrolsüz artışına bağlı olarak insanların ihtiyaçları her geçen gün artmaktadır. Bu ihtiyaçları karşılamak endüstrileşmeyi, şehirleşmeyi ve ekonomik gelişmeyi gerektirmektedir. Bu değişimler gerçekleşirken çevresel kaynakların tüketimi ve ekolojik çevrenin tahribatı artmaktadır.
Buna paralel olarak bu tüketim ve tahribatlar çevre kirliğini artırmakta ve çevresel kaliteyi düşürmektedir.
Ekonomik gelişme ile çevresel kirliliğin artması çelişkisine henüz çözüm getirilememiştir. Bu konuda sağlıklı ve güvenli bir çalışma ortamı oluşturmak için Mühendislik, Tıp ve benzer çevreler uzun zamandır bu konu üzerinde çalışmaktadırlar. Özellikle son yüzyılda gelişmiş ülkeler çevresel kirliliğe en fazla neden olmaları yanında, önlemeler alma konusundada başı çekmektedirler. Öte taraftan Avrupa Birliğinin uyum yasaları ve gelişen şartlara göre güncellenen kanun ve yönetmelikler çevrenin korunmasına destek vermektedir.
Bu iyileştirici çabaların başında işyerlerinin uygun çalışma ortamlarının yanında, çalışma düzenlerinin ve çalışma sistemlerinin olması büyük önem taşır.
İşyerlerine katkı sağlayabilecek yönetim sistemleri, firmaların politikalarının dışında tüm dünyada geçerli olan ISO 9001, ISO 14001 ve OHSAS 18001 yönetim sistemleridir.
Bu kalite, çevre ve iş sağlığı güvenliği sistemleri her geçen gün birbirine yaklaşmakta ve bu üç yönetim sistemi entegre olarak kullanılabilmektedir.
İş yerleri kendi yaptıkları işin özelliklerine göre yönetim sistemlerinin kombinasyonlarını seçmektedirler.
Her ne kadar üç yönetim sistemi birbirinden ayrı sistemler olarak görülürsede aralarında birbrlerine sinerjik etki yapabilecek organik bağlar mevcuttur. Yedi yılda bir yapılan revizyonlarda her bir sistemin birbirine yakınsadığı görülmektedir. Bu konuya ilerleyen bölümlerde değinilecektir.
Ne yazık ki çevreyi korumak için alınması gereken önlemlerde ülkemizde de gelişmeler olsada yeterli olmadığı uzmanlar tarafından belirtilmektedir.
Bunun en önemli göstergelerinden biri iş kazalarıdır. İş kazaları sadece can ve mal kayıpları ile sınırlı kalmamakta çevresel felaketlerede neden olmaktadır.
Bu gibi durumları önlemek veya derinlemesine bir iyileştirme faaliyeti içinde olabilmek için firmalar veya tesislerde kanun ve yönetmeliklerin belirlediği kurallara uymak durumundadır.
Bu kuralların uygulanmasındaISO 9001 ve buna entegre OHSAS 18001 sistemleri uygulayıcılara ve çalışanlara kolaylık ve düzen sağlayabilir.
Böylece iş kazaları sebebi ile zaman ve mekan düzleminde oluşan büyük maliyetlere neden olan kayıpların önüne geçilebilir. Bu düzenleme ile aynı zamanda insan hatası sebebi ile çevreyi etkileyebilecek potansiyelkazalarında önüne geçilebilir.
Çevresel felaketleri önleme toplumun çalışanları ile birlikte toplumun tüm bireylerinide kapsamaktadır. Bu çevre bilinci kavramını öne çıkarmaktadır.
Bu bilinç belkide her yıl tekrarlanan insan kaynaklı orman yangınlarını engelleyebilir.Ya da atık yönetiminde veya geri kazanım konusunda topluma bir ivme kazandırabilir.
Diğer taraftan var olan ve/veya kurulacak yeni tesislerin faaliyetlerinde fayda ve zarar ilişkileri iyi değerlendirilmelidir. Bunun için günümüzde Çevre Etki Değerlendirilmesi (ÇED) yapılmaktadır.
Bu tesislerin faaliyetlerinden kaynaklanan çevre etkilerinin yerel olmadığı aksine global olduğu bilim insanlarınca kabul edilmiş bir gerçektir.
Günümüzde insalar beklenti ve ihtiyaçlarının en üst düzeyde karşılanmasının yanı sı-ra , yaşadığı çevrenin korunması hatta daha iyi hale getirilmesi ve yaşadığı çevreyedeğer verilmesinitalep etmektedirler. Bu husulara aykırı olan uygulama ve eylemlere karşı itiraz etmekte hatta direnmektedirler.
Bu gelişmeler kuruluşların çevre ile etkileşimlerini kontrol altında tutabilmelerini ve çevre icraat ve başarılarını sürekli iyileştirebilmelerini sağlayacak yönetim sistemle-rine ihtiyaç bulunduğu gerçeğini ortaya çıkarmıştır.
Çevre Yönetim Sistemi tüm dünyada ISO 14001 Standardı ile bilinmektedir. Çevre Yönetim Sisteminin, ISO 9001 Kalite Yönetim Sistemi Standardından sonra ulusla-rarası kuruluşlarda tanınması ve uygulanması çok hızlı olmuştur.
1969 yılında ABD‟de yürürlüğe giren Ulusal Çevre Politikası Kanunu (National Environmental Policy Act)gerek AB ülkeleri, gerekse diğer dünya ülkelerinde halen en etkin çevre yönetim aracı olarak yerini alan ve gün geçtikçe de bu yeri sağlamlaştıran ÇED, Ülkemizde 1998 yılından bu yana 18/12 sayılı Çevre Yasasının 52. maddesi uyarınca hazırlanan ÇED Tüzüğü kapsamında uygulanmaktadır.
Bilindiği gibi Çevre Etki değerlendirmesi belirli bir projenin veya faaliyetin çevre üzerindeki etkilerin belirlendiği bir süreçtir.
Bu süreç, karar verme süreci olmayıp karar verme sürecine etki eden ve bunu destekleyen bir süreçtir.
ÇED ; yeni projelerin ve gelişmelerin, çevreye verebileceği süreli veya süresiz potansiyel etkileri, ekonomik katma değerinin, sosyal etkisinin sonuçlarını ve çözümlerinin değerlendirmesi analizini kapsamaktadır.Bu çalışmalara katkı sağlamak amacıyla bir model oluşturulmuştur.
Çevresel etki büyüklüğünü ortaya çıkarabilmek için, endüstriyel gelişim ve çevresel kirlilik çelişkisine sebep olan ana parametreler göz önüne alınmıştır.
Elde edilen çevresel Etki Büyüklüğü Çevre Yönetim Sistemleri (ÇYS) kullanılarak azaltılmıştır.
Bu çalışmalar sürecinde kullanılabilecek en uygun yöntemlerin Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi (AHP) ve Bulanık Mantık modellerinin olacağı düşünülmüştür.
Analitik Hiyerarşi Modelinin seçilme nedeni, çevresel Etki Büyüklüğünü ortaya çıkaracak alt faktörlerin hiyerarşisine sistematik bir yaklaşım sağlamaktır.
AHP temel özelliği olan ikili karşılaştırma yöntemi ile tüm alt faktörleri birbirleriyle ikili olarak karşılaştımıştır.
Kullanılan yöntemler klasik mantık teorilerini temel alan yöntemlerdir. Bu nedenle çevresel faktörler genellikle sayısallaştırılamayan, eksik, kusurlu ve elde edilemeyen bilgilerden dolayı net ve açık bir şekilde değerlendirilememektedir.
Bu sebeplerle belirsiz ve şüpheli olan değerlendirmelerde, Bulanık Mantık tabanlı modelleme kullanılmıştır.
Bulanık Mantık modeli ile uzman görüşlerinin dilsel değişkenleri, belirsizliklerin ve eksik verilerin yerine bir girdi olarak kullanılmıştır. Böylece çevresel Etki Büyüklüğünü hesaplamada kullanılan Faktör indeksi ve üyelik dereceleri bulunmuştur.
Önerilen yaklaşımın uygulama adımlarında, bir işletmenin çevreye verdiği etkiler ve çevre değerlerinin işletmeden etkilenmesi “büyük” ve “küçük” nitelemeleriyle değerlendirilmiştir.
Olası kombinasyonların elde edilen Etki Büyüklükleri hesaplanmıştır. Hesaplanan etki büyüklüğünü Çevre Yönetim Sistemi kombinasyonları olan ISO 9001, ISO 14001 ve OHSAS 18001 ile azaltma yöntemi geliştirilmiştir.
Bu çalışmada kullanılan yöntemler ve değerlendirmeler, herhangi bir işletmenin çevresel etkilerinin değerlendirilmesinde somut, anlaşılır ve sayısal bir modellendirme gerektirdiğini ortaya çıkarmıştır. Çevre ve ilgili çevrede bulunan işletmenin etki değerlendirmelerinde ekosistem ve işletme arasında sayısız oranda etkileşim faktörleri, çevresel etki büyüklüğünü elde etmede ana eksen olarak ele alınmıştır.
Diğer taraftan çevresel etki değendirmesinde elde edilen etki karekterizasyonları ile, karar vericiye, resmi ve hukuki çevreye,karar verme aşamalarında kullanılabilecekleri ,dilsel ve insani koşulların neden olduğu belirsizlikler, somut, sayısal ve ölçülebilir bir değer haline getirilmiştir.
Böylece karar vericinin, elde edilen bu somut verilerle herhangi planlı veya izinli bir faaliyetin yada projenin, çevre yönetim değerlendirmesini kolaylıkla yapabileceği aşıkardır.
Önerilen modelde bir işletmenin çevre ile ilişkileri dört kombinasyon halinde ele alınmıştır. Bu kombinasyonlardan birincisi, işletmenin çevreye etkisinin büyük ve çevresel etkilenmeninde büyük olduğu, ikinci kombinasyon işletmenin çevreye etkisi büyük ve çevresel etkilenmenin küçük, üçüncü kombinasyon işletmenin çevreye etkisinin küçük ve çevresel etkilenmenin büyük, dördüncü ve son kombinasyon işletmenin çevreye etkisinin küçük ve çevresel etkilenmenin küçükolduğu durumlardır.
Uygulama sonucunda ortaya çıkan etki büyüklüğünün sınıfı ve derecesi belirlenmiştir. Ortaya çıkan etki büyüklüğünün Kalite, çevre yönetim , iş sağlığı ve güvenliği yönetim sistemlerinin kombinasyonları ile nasıl azaltılabileceği yöntemi gösterilmiştir. Bu seçimlerde işletmeye hesaplamalarda ortaya çıkan etki büyüklüğünün azaltılmasında maliyetleri azaltabilecek optimum çözüm yoluda gösterilmiştir.
Modelde, Çevresel Etkilerin azaltılmasına katkı sağlamak amacıyla, işletmenin özelliğine göre iyileştirme aracının Çevre Yönetim Sistemlerine destek olarak kullanılması tavsiye edilmektedir.
Çevresel Etkileri azaltılmada Çevre Yönetim Sistemlerinin araçlarından faydalanılan bir derecelendirme skalası elde edilmiştir.
Böylece Çevresel Etki değerlendirmeleri için, karar vericiye esnek alternatifler sunulmuştur. Modelin, Projelerin planlama aşamasındaki ÇED çalışmalarında kantitatif destek olarak kullanılması önerilmektedir. Çalışmada kullanılan modelle işletme ve bulunduğu çevrede oluşan karşılıklı etkileşimlerin, kullanılacak Entegre
Yönetim sistemleri ile işletmelerin yarattığı olumsuz çevresel etkilerinazaltılabileceği veya kabul edilebilir sınırlara getirilebileceği umut edilmektedir.
1. INTRODUCTION
Environmental resources have been induced by human activity and it has been steadily growing concern in a few decades. Such concerns made an evident the necessity for preventive and corrective actions for the executive organs and/or authorities on a sound basis implementation regarding the possible environmental consequences of development actions.
In order to perform and satisfy this need, the most import tools is Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).
This content of EIAinvolves thе ѕyѕtеmаtiс idеntifiсаtiоn аnd еvаluаtiоn оf thе imрасtѕ оn thе еnvirоnmеnt саuѕеd by а рrороѕеd рrоjесt. Itѕ роtеntiаl rоlе in аttаining ѕuѕtаinаblе dеvеlорmеnt оbjесtivеѕ wаѕ еxрliсitly rесоgnizеd during thе 1992 Еаrth Ѕummit hеld in Riо dе Jаnеirо (Unitеd Nаtiоnѕ 1992).
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process is an interdisciplinary and multistep procedure to ensure that environmental considerations are included in decisions regarding projects that may impact the environment. Simply defined, the EIA process helps identify the possible environmental effects of a proposed activity and how those impacts can be mitigated. The purpose of the EIA process is to inform decision-makers and the public of the environmental consequences of implementing a proposed project.
The EIA document itself is a technical tool that identifies, predicts, and analyzes impacts on the physical environment, as well as social, cultural, and health impacts. If the EIA process is successful, it identifies alternatives and mitigation measures to reduce the environmental impact of a proposed project.
The EIA process also serves an important procedural role in the overall decision-making process by promoting transparency and public involvement. It is important to note that the EIA process does not guarantee that a project will be modified or rejected if the process reveals that there will be serious environmental impacts. In some countries, a decision-maker may, in fact, choose the most environmentally-harmful alternative, as long as the consequences are disclosed in the EIA. In other
words, the EIA process ensures an informed decision, but not necessarily an environmentally beneficial decision (Elaw, 2010).
1.1 Aim & Scope
The objective of this study is modeling of integration of the Environmental Management System (EMS) for providing a solution to the controversial subject such as discussions, uncertainties or civil disobedience about Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports or its acceptance. An official EIA permission (or report) is usually caused some problems such as sensitive eco-system characteristics, public rejection regarding side selection etc.. In order to eliminate those questionable and complex issues, an analytic scale system is generated within this study which has an objective to help the decision makers. It is thought that this scale may contribute also to clarify or remove to uncertainty at applicable legislation.
Within the framework of the purposes given above;
A problem is defined by investigating of historical, scientific and legal development on EIA.
Various methodologies are integrated on impact assessment results for solving problem.
The constituent of formulation are applied to FAHP which is one of the elements of Multi Criteria Decision Analysis ( MCDA).
The constituent of environmental management are given in the model as ISO 9001, ISO 14001, OHSAS 18001 and Remediation.
In order to realize the integration issues which are stated in a theoretical base, a model is developed.
For priority numbers which will be obtained by fuzzification, a FAHP is installed and a range is obtained for providing maximum and minimum values of impact magnitude.
The correlation between BoP and EEI are made base on small and large state of the combination.
According to the result of three different states, EIA report can be rejected or accepted directly or revised by correction of EMS. To sum up the purposes of the study are as follows:
Provide information for decision-making on the environmental consequences of proposed actions; and
Promote a management methodology for obtaining most appropriate environmental impact.
It is hoped or expected to put the individuals at ease with scientific norms and to omit uncertainties and conflicts with decision makers, state direction investor or third party who represent generally the public.
In addition, the another aim of this study, the impacts of any strategic point source such as nuclear power plant, thermal power station, mining etc which will be caused to environmental degradation and the depletion of environmental resources can be also taken into account. In the study, two significant constituent takes places, first is Benefit of Project (BoP) on technical, socio-political and environmental factors and second is Estimated Environmental Impact (EEI) on Flora, Fauna – Forest, Water – Watershed, Surface & Groundwater, Agricultural Area, Recreational Area, Urbanization, Climate, Air Quality, Historical & Touristic Area and Geomorphologic Structural Area. In practice, range of impact magnitude can be easy applied for all proposal projects for helping to decision makers especially in EIA permission and acceptance step. In this connection, immediate objectives of EIA are to:
improve the environmental design of the proposal;
ensure that resources are used appropriately and efficiently;
identify appropriate measures for mitigating the potential impacts of the proposal; and
facilitate informed decision making, including setting the
environmental terms and conditions for implementing the proposal. Long term objectives of EIA are to:
protect human health and safety;
avoid irreversible changes and serious damage to the environment; safeguard valued resources, natural areas and ecosystem components; and
2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
2.1 History and Evaluation of Environmental Impact Assessment
To give a general idea of the historical development of EIA is shown in Table 2.1. Introduced in the US as its beginning, several countries have followed and applied EIA systems. At the same time, international efforts in sustainable development have been promoting to assist developing nations. In recent years, the concept of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) – applying EIA consideration in earlier stage of policy-making, become prevailing and some practical cases are reported.
US was the first country to develop a system of environmental impact assessment (EIA). When “Silent Spring” written by Rachel Carson was published in 1962, social awareness to environmental issues in the US had reached high proportions and grew as very intense movements at the latter half of 1960‟s. With these social backgrounds, the National Environmental Policy Act (1969) of the United States of America (NEPA) was constituted and for the first time, EIA requiring environmental consideration in large-scale projects was enforced as legislation. The influence of NEPA in which the concept of EIA system as its bedrock was extended beyond the US and provoked the introduction of EIA policy in many countries in Europe and Asia. Following the US initiative, several countries began to provide EIA systems; for example Australia (1974), Thailand (1975), France (1976), Philippines (1978), Israel (1981) and Pakistan (1983). Generally, EIA is more efficient and effective to be implemented as early as possible, for example at the policy or project-planning phase. In practice however, the implementation period of the EIA, as well as its scope and procedures vary by each country and agency, and each system holds their own unique characteristics.( EAGoJ 2000)
The evolution of EIA can be divided into four overlapping phases:
Introduction and early development (1970-1975) – mandate and foundations of EIA established in the USA; then adopted by a few
other countries (e.g. Australia, Canada, New Zealand); basic concept, procedure and methodology still apply.
Increasing scope and sophistication (mid ‟70s to early ‟80s) – more advanced techniques (e.g. risk assessment); guidance on process
implementation (e.g. screening and scoping); social impacts considered; public inquiries and reviews drive innovations in leading countries; take up of EIA still limited but includes developing countries (e.g. China, Thailand and the Philippines).
Process strengthening and integration (early „80‟s to early ‟90s) – Review of EIA practice and experience; scientific and institutional frameworks of EIA updated; coordination of EIA with other processes, (e.g. Project appraisal, land use planning); ecosystem-level changes and cumulative effects begin to be addressed; attention given to monitoring and other follow-up mechanisms. Many more countries adopt EIA; the European Community and the World Bank respectively establish supra - national and international lending requirements.
Strategic and sustainability orientation (early ‟90s to date) EIA
aspects enshrined in international agreements (see Topic 2 – Law, policy and institutional arrangements); marked increase in international training, capacity building and networking activities; development of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) of policies and plans; inclusion of sustainability concepts and criteria in EIA and SEA practice; EIA applied in all OECD countries and large number of developing and transitional countries. (Sadler, 1996)
The UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), the Earth Summit, established a number of international agreements, declarations and commitments. Agenda 21, the global action plan for sustainable development, emphasizes the importance of integrated environment and development decision-making and promotes the use of EIA and other policy instruments for this purpose. As a summary, four cornerstones of the Earth Summit is given below;
The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development – a set of Principles which provide guidance on achieving sustainable development.
Table 2.1: History of Environmental Impact Assessment.
History Development of EIA
Pre-1970 Project review based on the technical/engineering and economic analysis.Limited consideration given to environmental consequences.
Early/Mid-1970s
EIA introduced by NEPA in 1970 in US. Basic principle: Guidelines, procedures including public participation requirement instituted.Standard methodologies for impact analysis developed (e.g. matrix, checklist and network).Canada, Australia and New Zealand became first countries to follow NEPA in 1973-1974. Unlike Australia, which legislated EIA, Canada and New Zealand established administrative procedures.Major public inquires help to shape the process development.
Late 1970 and Early 1980s
More formalized guidance.Other industrial and developing countries introduced formal EIA requirements (France, 1976; Philippines, 1977) began to use the process informally or experimentally ( Netherlands, 1978) or adopted elements, such as impact statements or reports, as part of development applications for planning permission (German states, Ireland).
Use of EA by developing countries (Brazil, Philippines, China, Indonesia).Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA), risk analysis included in EA processes.Greater emphasis on ecological modeling, prediction and evaluation methods.Provision for public involvement.Coordination of EA with land use planning processes. Mid 1980s
to end of decade
In Europe, EC Directive on EIA establishes basic principle and procedural requirements for all member states.Increasing efforts to address cumulative effects.World Bank and other leading international aid agencies establish EA requirements.Spread of EIA process in Asia.
1990s
Requirement to consider trans-boundary effects under Espoo convention.Increase use of GIS and other information technologies. Sustainability principal and global issues receive increased attention. India also adopted the EIA formally.Formulation of EA legislation by
many developing countries. Rapid growth in EA training.
Framework Convention on Climate Change – an international treaty to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere.
Convention on Biological Diversity – an international convention with three objectives: the conservation of biodiversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resources. Agenda 21 – a global program of action for achieving sustainable
development to which countries are „politically committed‟ rather than legally obligated.(UNEP, 2002)
2.2 Definition of Environmental Impact Assessment
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process of evaluating the likely environmental impacts of a proposed project or development, taking into account inter-related socio-economic, cultural and human-health impacts, both beneficial and adverse
.
United Nation Environment Program (UNEP) defines Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as a tool used to identify the environmental, social and economic impacts of a project prior to decision-making. It aims to predict environmental impacts at an early stage in project planning and design, find ways and means to reduce adverse impacts, shape projects to suit the local environment and present the predictions and options to decision-makers. By using EIA both environmental and economic benefits can be achieved, such as reduced cost and time of project implementation and design, avoided treatment/clean-up costs and impacts of laws and regulations.
Although legislation and practice vary around the world, the fundamental components of an EIA would necessarily involve the following stages:
Screening to determine which projects or developments requires a full or partial impact assessment study;
Scoping to identify which potential impacts are relevant to assess (based on legislative requirements, international conventions, expert knowledge and public involvement), to identify alternative solutions that avoid, mitigate or compensate adverse impacts on biodiversity (including the option of not proceeding with the development, finding alternative designs or sites which avoid the impacts,
Assessment and evaluation of impacts and development of alternatives, to predict and identify the likely environmental impacts of a proposed project or development, including the detailed elaboration of alternatives;
Reporting the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or EIA report, including an environmental management plan (EMP), and a non-technical summary for the general audience.
Review of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), based on the terms of reference (scoping) and public (including authority) participation.
Decision-making on whether to approve the project or not, and under what conditions; and
Monitoring, compliance, enforcement and environmental auditing; Monitor whether
the predicted impacts and proposed mitigation measures occur as defined in the EMP. Verify the compliance of proponent with the EMP, to ensure that unpredicted impacts or failed mitigation measures are identified and addressed in a timely fashion. A general process flowchart is shown in Figure 2.1(CBD, 2016)
It iѕ thе itеrаtivе, еаrly рlаnning аnd dеѕign ѕtаgеѕ оf а mаjоr рrоjесt thаt frеquеntly invоlvе, оr intеrасt with, ЕIА ѕtudiеѕ. During thеѕе реriоdѕ in thе рrоjесt сyсlе, th рrороnеnt tеndѕ tо аllосаtе а mоdеѕt budgеt tо dеvеlор ѕuffiсiеnt infоrmаtiоn аbоut thе рrоjесt‟ѕ dеѕign, соnѕtruсtiоn аnd ореrаtiоnѕ tо fееd intо thе ЕIА рrосеѕѕ аnd tо uѕе tо mаkе rесоmmеndаtiоnѕ fоr imрасt mitigаtiоn аnd mоnitоring.
All of these statements can be said as the benefits of EIA. In addition that another benefits of EIA are as follows.
Potentially screens out environmentally-unsound projects Proposes modified designs to reduce environmental impacts Identifies feasible alternatives
Predicts significant adverse impacts
Identifies mitigation measures to reduce, offset, or eliminate major impacts
Engages and informs potentially affected communities and individuals
Influences decision-making and the development of terms and Conditions (ELAW, 2010)
2.2.1 Environmental impact values
Еnvirоnmеntаl imрасtѕ аrе саtеgоrizеd аѕ рrimаry оr ѕесоndаry. Рrimаry imрасtѕ аrе thоѕе thаt саn bе аttributеd dirесtly tо thе рrороѕеd асtiоn. If thе асtiоnѕ invоlvе соnѕtruсtiоn оf а fасility, ѕuсh аѕ а wаѕtеwаtеr trеаtmеnt рlаnt оr а rеѕidеntiаl соlоny, thе рrimаry imрасtѕ оf thе асtiоn wоuld inсludе thе еnvirоnmеntаl imрасtѕ rеlаtеd tо thе соnѕtruсtiоn аnd ореrаtiоn оf thе fасility аnd lаnd uѕе сhаngеѕ аt thе fасility ѕitе.
Ѕесоndаry imрасtѕ аrе indirесt оr induсеd сhаngеѕ, tyрiсаlly inсluding аѕѕосiаtеd invеѕtmеntѕ аnd сhаngеd раttеrnѕ оf ѕосiаl аnd есоnоmiс асtivitiеѕ likеly tо bе ѕtimulаtеd оr induсеd by thе рrороѕеd асtiоn. If thе асtiоn invоlvеѕ thе соnѕtruсtiоn оf а fасility, thе ѕесоndаry imрасtѕ wоuld inсludе thе еnvirоnmеntаl imрасtѕ rеlаtеd tо induсеd сhаngеѕ in thе раttеrn оf lаnd uѕе, рорulаtiоn dеnѕity, аnd rеlаtеd еffесtѕ оn аir аnd wаtеr quаlity оr оthеr nаturаl rеѕоurсеѕ (Rаu, 1980).
Thе thrее соrе vаluеѕ оf аny ЕIА ѕtudy thаt hаvе bееn idеntifiеd till dаtе are; Intеgrity: Thе ЕIА рrосеѕѕ ѕhоuld bе fаir, оbjесtivе, unbiаѕеd аnd
bаlаnсеd.
Utility:Thе ЕIА рrосеѕѕ ѕhоuld рrоvidе bаlаnсеd, сrеdiblе infоrmаtiоn fоr dесiѕiоn-mаking.
Ѕuѕtаinаbility :Thе ЕIА рrосеѕѕ ѕhоuld rеѕult in
еnvirоnmеntаlsаfеguаrdѕ whiсh аrе ѕuffiсiеnt tо mitigаtе ѕеriоuѕ аdvеrѕе еffесtѕ аnd аvоid irrеvеrѕiblе lоѕѕ оf rеѕоurсе аnd есоѕyѕtеm funсtiоnѕ.
2.2.2 Strategic environmental assessment
Sadler and Verheem (1996) define Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) as the formalized, systematic and comprehensive process of identifying and evaluating the environmental consequences of proposed policies, plans or programs to ensure that they are fully included and appropriately addressed at the earliest possible stage of decision-making on a par with economic and social considerations.
Since this early definition the field of SEA has rapidly developed and expanded, and the number of definitions of SEA has multiplied accordingly. SEA, by its nature, covers a wider range of activities or a wider area and often over a longer time span
than the environmental impact assessment of projects.
SEA might be applied to an entire sector (such as a national policy on energy for example) or to a geographical area (for example, in the context of a regional development scheme). SEA does not replace or reduce the need for project-level EIA (although in some cases it can), but it can help to streamline and focus the incorporation of environmental concerns (including biodiversity) into the decision-making process, often decision-making project-level EIA a more effective process. SEA is commonly described as being proactive and „sustainability driven‟, whilst EIA is often described as being largely reactive (CBD, 2016).
2.2.3 Milestone and typology of EIA
The way of subdividing environmental issues is to group them under „green‟ and
„brown‟ agendas. The green agenda focuses on natural resource management and
environmental protection issues, such as rural land and water use, forestry and fisheries and habitat and species conservation. The brown agenda is concerned with issues of industrial pollution, waste management and urban development.
When undertaking EIA, a comprehensive view should be taken of the linkages and interactions among the issues under review. Also, the EIA should identify
both the benefits and costs of development. In practice, EIA often focuses on the adverse environmental impacts of proposed actions. This is done by
reference to certain key characteristics, which establish the potentially significant effects (see below).
Environmental impacts can vary in:
type – biophysical, social, health or economic nature – direct or indirect, cumulative, etc. magnitude or severity – high, moderate, low extent– local, regional, transboundary or global timing – immediate/long term
duration – temporary/permanent
uncertainty – low likelihood/high probability reversibility – reversible/irreversible
significance1 – unimportant/important
The impacts of a development proposal examined in EIA can be direct, such as the effect of toxic discharge on air and water quality, or indirect, such as the effect on human health from exposure to particulates or contaminants, which have built up in food chains. Other environmental and social impacts are induced, for example by a new road opening up an undeveloped area to subsequent settlement or by involuntary resettlement of people displaced by the construction of a large reservoir. Certain adverse impacts may appear relatively insignificant when considered in the context
1Impact significance is not necessarily related to the impact magnitude. Sometimes very small
of an individual action or proposal but have a cumulative effect on the environment when added to all other actions and proposals; for example, deforestation resulting from plot by plot clearance for subsistence agriculture (UNEP, 2002).
2.3 Environmental Impact Assessment Methods
EIA methods range from simple to complex, requiring different kinds of data, different data formats, and varying levels of expertise and technological sophistication for their interpretation. The analyses they produce have differing levels of precision and certainty. All of these factors should be considered when selecting a method.
The EIA practitioner is faced with a vast quantity of raw and usually unorganized information that must be collected and analyzed in preparation of an EIA report. The best methods are able to:
organize a large mass of heterogeneous data; allow summarization of data;
aggregate the data into smaller sets with least loss of information; display the raw data and the derived information in a direct and relevant fashion.
The situation of environment and environmental values should also be considered when choosing a method. At preliminary evaluation of facility and environment need to have clear information about solution method alternatives.
Whatever methods are chosen, the focus of impact assessment of any facility and surround of facility should be considered all possible potential impacts on selected environmental components. Before a comprehensive study on EIAs, decision makers needs to understand and evaluate the combination of facility and environment base on benefit and loss. Today‟s methods consider the environment to be a dynamic, integrated group of natural and social systems.
Impacts occur over time and space. Some impacts are immediate while others are delayed. Some impacts occur as a direct result of an activity; others occur as secondary or higher order impacts resulting from changes in other environmental components.
In selecting assessment methods, it helps to understand two perspectives underlying the utility of EIA. From the first perspective, EIA is a technique to analyze the
impacts of project activities, and is a complex and complicated procedure. The complexity is increased by the diversity of the disciplines involved; social, physical, and biological. This perspective holds that scientific experts should be responsible for conducting and reviewing EIAs, and that the maximum possible quantification should be accomplished. This element of decision-making should be incorporated into the EIA process. From a second perspective, EIA is primarily an opportunity to allow groups that are potentially affected populations, development agencies, and project proponents to participate in the decision-making process. This perspective suggests that;
decision making should not be restricted to scientific opinions alone, but should also reflect social and cultural viewpoints; and
a key role of EIA is to identify and communicate potential impacts to the concerned people and encourage rational discussion.
2.3.1 Methods for organizing and presenting information
Checklists and matrices are commonly used to organize and present information. Many of the more sophisticated methods and techniques often use checklists and matrices as a starting point for analysis.
Information Presented in Checklists and Matrices; All checklists and matrices have boxes or cells that must be filled with information about the nature of the impact. Depending on the method, this information can be descriptive or evaluative Table 2.2. The simplest methods merely determine the possibility or potential existence of an impact, while others, like weighting-scaling checklists, make judgments about the magnitude and importance of the impact. Matrix methods identify interactions between various project actions and environmental parameters and components. They incorporate a list of project activities with a checklist of environmental components that might be affected by these activities.
A matrix of potential interactions is produced by combining these two lists (placing one on the vertical axis and the other on the horizontal axis). One of the earliest matrix methods was developed by Leopold et al. (1971). In a Leopold matrix and its variants, the columns of the matrix correspond to project actions (for example, flow alteration) while the rows represent environmental conditions (for example, water temperature). The impact associated with the action columns and the environmental condition row is described in terms of its magnitude and significance.
Table 2.2: Information Presented in Checklists and Matrices. Impact
Characteristic Descriptive or Type of Determined Used By Method Identified or
Evaluated
Evaluative
Measure Scale By
Existence yes or no nominal Expert
Judgement Simple Checklist Duration short term or long
term nominal Expert Judgement Descriptive Checklist (Oregon Method) (Smardon et al., 1976) Reversibility reversible or irreversible nominal Expert Judgement Descriptive Checklist (Oregon Method) (Smardon et al., 1976) Magnitude minor, moderate or major nominal Expert Judgement Descriptive Checklist (Oregon Method) (Smardon et al., 1976) 1 to 10, with 1 representing small, 5 representing intermediate, 10, representing large
nominal Leopold Matrix
(Leopold et al, 1971) Causal relationship direct, indirect, or synergistic nominal Expert Judgement Descriptive Checklist (Oregon Method) (Smardon et al., 1976) Importance 1 to 10, with 1 representing low, 10 representing high interval Subjective Judgement Descriptive Checklist (Oregon Method) (Smardon et al., 1976) 0 to 1000, where
the sum of the importance weights is equal to 1000 interval Subjective Judgement Battelle Environmental Evaluation System (Dee et al., 1972) Environmental Impact Units (EIU) 0 to 1, with 0 representing poor quality, 1 representing very good quality interval Value Functions based on expert or subjective jugment Battelle Environmental Evaluation System (Dee et al., 1972) Benefit/Cost + for benefit nominal Subjective
jugment
Fisher and Davis (1973) - for cost Significance no impact nominal subjective and expert judgment H.A. Simons (1992) insignificant impact significant impact mitigated impact unknown impact
Most matrices were built for specific applications, although the Leopold Matrix itself is quite general. Matrices can be tailor-made to suit the needs of any project that is to be evaluated.
They should preferably cover both the construction and the operation phases of the project, because sometimes, the former causes greater impacts than the latter. Simple matrices are useful:
early in EIA processes for scoping the assessment; for identifying areas that require further research; and
for identifying interactions between project activities and specific environmental components.
However, matrices also have their disadvantages: they tend to overly simplify impact pathways, they do not explicitly represent spatial or temporal considerations, and they do not adequately address synergistic impacts.
Matrices require information about both the environmental components and project activities. The cells of the matrix are filled in using subjective (expert) judgment, or by using extensive data bases. There are two general types of matrices:
simple interaction matrices;
significance or importance-rated matrices.
Simple matrix methods simply identify the potential for interaction Significance or importance-rated methods require either more extensive data bases or more experience to prepare.
Values assigned to each cell in the matrix are based on scores or assigned ratings, not on measurement and experimentation. For example, the significance or importance of impact may be categorized (no impact, insignificant impact, significant impact, or uncertain).
Alternatively, it may be assigned a numerical score (for example, 0 is no impact, 10 is maximum impact).
These numerical scores are often used in FAHP applications to be described in Chapter 5 and 6.
3. INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (IMS)
The global competition has compelled organizations to invest their resources in enhancing their management efficiency and this has resulted in profound changes affecting every aspects of business including customer care, supplier management, strategy identification and implementation, process engineering and human resources (Renzi, &Cappelli, 2000).
Organizations implement available methods and approaches as a means of improving their performance and business system. There are various practices, disciplines and processes within an organization each meant for a separate objective. Combining all those practices, principles processes into one system so as to address a particular objective is known as their integration into a system (Hoyle, 2009). Integrated management system is an important tool for an organization which helps in improving process, increasing competitiveness and strategy realization (Spilka, Kania, &Nowosielski, 2009). According to Hoyle (2009), the term "integration" itself is a vague topic and should explicitly refer about what is being integrated.
For example, integration can be perceived as integrating documentation, integrating management, integrating standards, integrating functions or integrating systems. Organizations adopt management systems according to their need and scope. ISO 9001serves for the requirement of quality management, ISO 14001 for the environmental management system and OHSAS 18001 addresses occupational health and safety issues (McDonald, Mors, & Phillips, 2003). It is likely that organizations implementing ISO 14001 have an existing quality management system meeting the requirements of ISO 9001 in place.
Management systems are sometimes obligations of customers to the suppliers which require suppliers to be registered to a quality standard such as ISO 9001 or QS-9000 in addition to ISO 14001 (McDonald et al., 2003). According to Whitelaw (2004), the need for integrated management systems has long been felt and there have been attempts on the development of one definitive standard that could address all of an organization's activities and could be used as a model for the successful running of
the business. The degree to which an organization integrates its management systems depends on its specific needs and the organization is required to evaluate the management systems and plan for their integration as per the business needs. The organizations that successfully integrated portions or all of their management systems have reported to have achieved significant returns on their investment due to reduced operating cost and increased overall performance (Bishal, 2010).
3.1 Dimensions of Integration
Integrated Management System (IMS) makes sense to break down the successful integration of a management system into several dimensions (Figure 3.1).
Figure 3.1: Top Down Integration.
The integration of topics and requirements such as Quality, the Environment, Occupational Health and Safety, risks, social responsibility and industry-specific requirements is, in most cases, given utmost priority when designing an IMS. The different requirements resulting from standards and industry standards often also correspond to the demands made by the individual stakeholders.
In the past, these requirements were often viewed in an isolated manner and presented in separate systems and structures. In an increasingly complex and challenging environment, qualities like speed, flexibility, operational perfection and agility are expected from organizations. This can be best guaranteed by understanding the connections and interrelations of processes, integrating the
different requirements and keeping the documentation simple and comprehensible as well as easy to amend and improve.
3.2 The Development towards Integrated Management Systems
The development of today‟s integrated management systems can be roughly divided into the following characteristic development periods: With the onset of the industrial boom after World War 2, awareness that “quality testing” alone would not be enough to support professional product manufacturing arose. The motto of those times was “You cannot test quality into a product. It has to be built in during the manufacturing process”. This marked the beginning of quality assurance and quality assurance systems. This principle was supported by numerous representatives of interests and the first rules and standards on quality assurance systems came into being. In 1987, the ISO 9000 standard was published. The basic requirements laid down in the different quality assurance rules and regulations were integrated in this standard. ISO 9001 gained wide acceptance within a short period of time. Based on this standard, a third-party certification system with international validity was established and, with a view to revising and enhancing this certification system, an internationally harmonized accreditation system was created. These were the basics that contributed to the global spreading of ISO 9001 certification. According to the ISO Survey, more than 1.1 million organizations had obtained an ISO 9001 certification until 2011. In 1992, the EU published the EMAS (“Environmental Management Audit Scheme”) Regulation on environmental management and, in 1996, the global environmental management standard ISO 14001 followed. Both environmental management systems have their roots in the 1992 World Summits on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro. The OHSAS 18001 standard on occupational health and safety was issued by the OHSAS consortium in 1999. In 2000, the system-process model was integrated in a new version of ISO 9001, the most widespread Standard on management systems, as a basic requirement. Priority was given to orientation towards customers, processes and staff. The process-oriented approach still forms a strong base for designing and certifying management systems of organizations. Coordinated processes with control criteria for essential aspects and their internalization in day-to-day routines are the basis for all management areas. The basic understanding enshrined therein is also the basis for
additional system standards, e.g. for environmental management and safety management. The newly developed strategies and the programs, projects and/or measures derived from such strategies have an impact both on the process goals and the realization processes and thus also on process performance. The priorities within the system might change, resulting in strong interrelations between the goals set, the provision of resources and the supervision and measuring of the realization processes.
Implementing measures do not only refer to quality aspects but also to environmental aspects such as energy and material efficiency, water consumption, waste, land consumption and emissions and occupational health and safety aspects. The situation is similar when it comes to new and changed procedures and/or the use of new hazardous substances in the field of occupational health and safety. As a consequence, new internal and external staff training may become necessary.
3.3 Plan-Do-Check-Act
In practice, quality management lends itself to being a good integration platform for standardized management areas. As the process-oriented approach is comprehensively embedded, the entire organization is already mapped in a quality management system. The PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle plays a major role in this connection. In practice, this cycle serves as a model for the continuous improvement process.
As the management system standards ISO 14001:2004 and OHSAS 18001:2007 follow the same approach, their requirements can be well integrated into an existing classification of a quality management system.
There are interrelations between the different core and support processes, e.g. between product specification, production and marketing or sales, but also between distribution and procurement. Other interrelations might arise from the additional perspectives of environmental protection and occupational health and safety.
Practical approaches to integration are presented in the next section. “Systemic Management” means setting system goals and aligning the relevant processes and required resources accordingly. Basically, it is always about satisfying requirements, be they customer requirements or legal requirements regarding the product or, as in
